The OneOak Design Product Specification

Part of the OneOak product development methodology is the integration of all technical disciplines involved in product development to work side-by-side at the onset of every program.  This is something that many people nod their heads at and “agree” with.  The one thing we have found is that a typical corporate product development cycle involves a very short (maybe an hour or two) meeting with the key team members.  Once this meeting is over, everyone scatters.  Industrial Design goes to their desk on the 2nd floor, mechanical engineering goes to their desk on the other side of the building, electrical engineering goes back into the lab.

The issue with this separation of disciplines (we call it “discipline silos”) is that the most critical part of the development cycle is at the very beginning.  Planning and evaluating what is needed to be done with the program is essential.  Each discipline needs to deeply understand what the needs of the other group are.  No one group has any aspect of their cycle that does not affect another.

Some examples using a cell phone as an example:

- Software requires a more RAM affects Hardware (HW) layout
- HW layout needs more space for RAM moving the camera by 5 mm
- Camera movement by 5 mm affects mechanical enclosure CAD model
- Camera movement by 5 mm throws off ergonomic placement of camera lens so it doesn’t get covered by fingers.

It’s very similar to throwing a rock into a still pond.  The change ripples out and eventually affects every part of the lake.

What we suggest to our clients is a Product Specification.  This product can, and is, used for several purposes.  Marketing can use it to create an accurate business model for sales, all technical disciplines use it as the guidance for their development.  All the needs of the product (features, physical size, etc.) are spelled out and signed off on.

If everyone is involved in the process, everyone gets an intimate understanding of how their needs affect every discipline.  We’ve used this process to reduce product volume by 35% and timeline by 25% over previous generations, using the same team members.  The difference was HOW and WHERE we worked.  We worked (literally) side-by-side, elbow-to-elbow as opposed to in our separate silos.  Not just a couple hours.  A couple weeks doing this.

Many balk at the idea of paying an upfront “planning” cost when at the end of the day, that cost is saved many times over.